Havlat

Please point out ANY players on this team who are driving the slot on the rush or shooting on 2 on 1's? You can't, because no one is, because the coach is very clearly not directing them to do that. He said himself, he's telling them to maintain control of the puck and grind it out, Havlat is doing exactly what he is being told, and doing a pretty good job of it.

Get a coach in there that tells them to drive the net in waves, score on the transition, and I guarantee you Havlat will shine. He is being miss-used, just like the majority of the team.

Uhh ....I need to point players who would actually shoot it (let alone skate in on) a 2 n 1 chance? Hahaha ..seriously?? All of them except Havlat ...and maybe Thornton would still try to pass it back. Clowe might decide to skate to the half boards too

There is no good excuse for how passive Havlat plays and saying that Marleau, Couture, Pavs, Burns, Irwin, Boyle, Wingels, Desi, etc. wouldn't be able to at least get a shot off on those 2 on 1's is just plain wrong. But that's just one example of Havlat's poor play anyway.

Uhh ....I need to point players who would actually shoot it (let alone skate in on) a 2 n 1 chance? Hahaha ..seriously?? All of them except Havlat ...and maybe Thornton would still try to pass it back. Clowe might decide to skate to the half boards too

There is no good excuse for how passive Havlat plays and saying that Marleau, Couture, Pavs, Burns, Irwin, Boyle, Wingels, Desi, etc. wouldn't be able to at least get a shot off on those 2 on 1's is just plain wrong. But that's just one example of Havlat's poor play anyway.

I think we've been watching different teams, you are so off base I don't even know where to begin. I'm pretty sure I'm right since McLellan and Doug Wilson both had to make statements recently about how the entire team needs to shoot more and stop passing the puck all the time, you know, when Havlat was out injured.

Oh, Havlat had the most shots on goal of the entire team in the last game btw, with 6. Totally passive.

You can add in Boyle b/c he has driven the slot. Yep that is 2 D..
And yes Toddr is saying shoot..he said shoot from anywhere, get MORE shots.

The problem lies with their D system of contain rather than attack in the D zone and THAT system affects the transition game and IMO the compete level of the team. Its kinda like playing zone D in basketball and it may limit shots but it limits aggressiveness and tenaciousness and in the end if affects overall compete levels..IMO

Todd is not telling Havlat to play soft and not compete ..
watch tonight how many times havlat fishes or poke checks for pucks rather than body on body. Watch how many times Havlat button hooks rather than finishing a guy on the forecheck or in the O zone....

i get it, he is crafty, but he is soft and injury prone. Ship him out for a bag of pucks and a pick b/c there is absolutely no leverage with him and he is not productive enough to stick around after this year.

And yet he had 6 shots on goal in the last game, leading the team, and his defensive stats have consistently been some of the best on the team since the trade. Funny how that works.

Also, he's 5th on the team in shots per game... Ahead of Boyle, Burns, Thornton...

I think we've been watching different teams, you are so off base I don't even know where to begin. I'm pretty sure I'm right since McLellan and Doug Wilson both had to make statements recently about how the entire team needs to shoot more and stop passing the puck all the time, you know, when Havlat was out injured.

Oh, Havlat had the most shots on goal of the entire team in the last game btw, with 6. Totally passive.

Shots mean nothing when they come from him because he can't shoot to save his life!
As for his defensive stats ..he's on the ice with Couture like %62 of the time and Couture is our best defensive forward by a long shot ...But none of that really is as damning as watching him casually avoid the slot all game long.

Shots mean nothing when they come from him because he can't shoot to save his life!
As for his defensive stats ..he's on the ice with Couture like %62 of the time and Couture is our best defensive forward by a long shot ...But none of that really is as damning as watching him casually avoid the slot all game long.

So first he doesn't shoot, now that I proved he does shoot you change your story that he doesn't take good shots. I see.

None of that is true. Couture is not our best defensive forward, not even close. Pavelski generally is or Thornton, Marleau and Havlat, then Couture.

And again, because you seem unable to grasp it, McLellan admitted to telling them to play like that. He's been told to grind and cycle, not drive the net. Blame McLellan, not Havlat.

There is more to a hockey player than just checking and playing physical.

I completely agree and that wasn't my point. I apologize for not being clearer. Hockey, by nature is a physical sport. So you should be able to maintain your health somewhat while playing professionally.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd

You don't pay anyone 5 mil to check or play physical. I don't hear anyone complaining about Couture or Pavelski's physicality or lack thereof.

I wasn't suggesting that you pay someone $5 mil to play physical, but Juicy and Pavs score more, are more consistent, younger, cheaper and can maintain a somewhat physical game. I don't want to spend $5 mil of our cap for the next few seasons on someone because they can skate well, be creative and fill a top 6 role.

I wasn't suggesting that you pay someone $5 mil to play physical, but Juicy and Pavs score more, are more consistent, younger, cheaper and can maintain a somewhat physical game. I don't want to spend $5 mil of our cap for the next few seasons on someone because they can skate well, be creative and fill a top 6 role.

The only reason why Havlat's contract is more expensive than those two is because who signed it from the GM point of view. Havlat brings a dynamic to the team that neither of those two will ever bring. If you don't want to spend money on skill, you don't want to win in this league, plain and simple. Yes, his durability is a valid criticism but unless you find a similar type player to replace him, moving him just because he makes a pretty penny isn't the way to go. There are lots of other expendable pieces that they can lose before they worry about him.

The only reason why Havlat's contract is more expensive than those two is because who signed it from the GM point of view. Havlat brings a dynamic to the team that neither of those two will ever bring. If you don't want to spend money on skill, you don't want to win in this league, plain and simple. Yes, his durability is a valid criticism but unless you find a similar type player to replace him, moving him just because he makes a pretty penny isn't the way to go. There are lots of other expendable pieces that they can lose before they worry about him.

I agree that he has world class skill. Personally, I am a huge fan of his and was extremely excited when he was traded to us. But in the big picture, I would rather spend that $5 mil on 2 solid player for the bottom 6 that aren't as injury prone. We need to start adding more depth to this team and it might come at the cost of a skilled player like Marty.

I agree that he has world class skill. Personally, I am a huge fan of his and was extremely excited when he was traded to us. But in the big picture, I would rather spend that $5 mil on 2 solid player for the bottom 6 that aren't as injury prone. We need to start adding more depth to this team and it might come at the cost of a skilled player like Marty.

I agree with this sentiment. This isn't the Havlat from '09, and while he still brings a certain dynamic to the top 6, Id rather spend that money on two bottom sixers who are younger and more durable

I agree that he has world class skill. Personally, I am a huge fan of his and was extremely excited when he was traded to us. But in the big picture, I would rather spend that $5 mil on 2 solid player for the bottom 6 that aren't as injury prone. We need to start adding more depth to this team and it might come at the cost of a skilled player like Marty.

I agree that he has world class skill. Personally, I am a huge fan of his and was extremely excited when he was traded to us. But in the big picture, I would rather spend that $5 mil on 2 solid player for the bottom 6 that aren't as injury prone. We need to start adding more depth to this team and it might come at the cost of a skilled player like Marty.

If you really want to look at the big picture, you'll see that they don't need to sacrifice Havlat to acquire those pieces. They have four players in Wingels, Desjardins, Galiardi, and Sheppard who are either under contract or RFA's. That's a pretty solid start for a bottom six if they're being played and used properly. And they will have enough space even with a reduced cap to fill the rest out. And if they need more, I'd sooner buy out Burish via the compliance than trade Havlat for that purpose.

If you really want to look at the big picture, you'll see that they don't need to sacrifice Havlat to acquire those pieces. They have four players in Wingels, Desjardins, Galiardi, and Sheppard who are either under contract or RFA's. That's a pretty solid start for a bottom six if they're being played and used properly. And they will have enough space even with a reduced cap to fill the rest out. And if they need more, I'd sooner buy out Burish via the compliance than trade Havlat for that purpose.

I think it just depends on what we could get for Havlat in a trade. If the Sharks could get a 1st and good prospect I think I'd do it. But I agree with you, I'd obviously get rid of Burish before Havlat if that was an option(to clear cap space if we wanted). And we do have a pretty solid bottom six, but could still use some improvement

I think it just depends on what we could get for Havlat in a trade. If the Sharks could get a 1st and good prospect I think I'd do it. But I agree with you, I'd obviously get rid of Burish before Havlat if that was an option(to clear cap space if we wanted). And we do have a pretty solid bottom six, but could still use some improvement

I doubt that would be the case. Havlat has a full NMC and I doubt he'd go to a team that would offer such a deal that would be all that good anyway.

I think it just depends on what we could get for Havlat in a trade. If the Sharks could get a 1st and good prospect I think I'd do it. But I agree with you, I'd obviously get rid of Burish before Havlat if that was an option(to clear cap space if we wanted). And we do have a pretty solid bottom six, but could still use some improvement

Wedge, I don't think that we could get a 1st AND a solid prospect for Havlat at this point but I do think that we could get a solid tweener or a decent pick. People in this thread still think Marty is a talented player so who knows what other GMs think. There's not many teams that can take his cap hit without sending back a player with a similar cap hit.

I'm also not worried about his NMC. Not many players stay in a situation where they're not wanted. But Alan Walsh is his agent and isn't the easiest guy to work out deals with, so I'm sure he would make a lot of noise on Twitter.

Wedge, I don't think that we could get a 1st AND a solid prospect for Havlat at this point but I do think that we could get a solid tweener or a decent pick. People in this thread still think Marty is a talented player so who knows what other GMs think. There's not many teams that can take his cap hit without sending back a player with a similar cap hit.

I'm also not worried about his NMC. Not many players stay in a situation where they're not wanted. But Alan Walsh is his agent and isn't the easiest guy to work out deals with, so I'm sure he would make a lot of noise on Twitter.

You say that people in this thread still think he's a talented player as if he isn't anymore.

Doug Wilson is one of the guys that has wanted Havlat for years. As long as he is GM, he's not getting moved.

You say that people in this thread still think he's a talented player as if he isn't anymore.

Doug Wilson is one of the guys that has wanted Havlat for years. As long as he is GM, he's not getting moved.

I know that DW had wanted him for years. He even had a trade with the Sens worked out: Havlat for Tosk straight up but Marty didn't want to come to San Jose. Doug also wanted the old Havlat... I don't know if he's been thrilled with the Havlat that's played in teal the past season and a half.

Wedge, I don't think that we could get a 1st AND a solid prospect for Havlat at this point but I do think that we could get a solid tweener or a decent pick. People in this thread still think Marty is a talented player so who knows what other GMs think. There's not many teams that can take his cap hit without sending back a player with a similar cap hit.

I'm also not worried about his NMC. Not many players stay in a situation where they're not wanted. But Alan Walsh is his agent and isn't the easiest guy to work out deals with, so I'm sure he would make a lot of noise on Twitter.

Who knows V? In a situation where SJ ate some salary, that might be a potential return from a team who is desperate. Gaustad can get a 1st but Havlat can't?